General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.
by seenmostofit » Fri 24 Aug 2012, 20:57:56
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('seenmostofit', '
')
So when the MMS does a scientific inventory, using modern geophysical methods, to count this stuff up, it doesn't count?
http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy- ... Index.aspxSheesh. You didn't even bother to read your own link so you got the facts wrong.
Oh, I'm not so sure about that.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')
(1) the MMS doesn't do surveys---it doesn't even exist anymore. The Obama administration transmogrified it into the BOEM after its disastrous performance during the BP oil spill.
No, they changed the name. Calling a cows tail a leg doesn't mean the cow has 5 legs, it just means someone changed the name and presto! Instant change. 99.999% of the people who were MMS are now BOEM, and its sidekick agency BSEE (Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering?)
http://www.boemre.govSo for many decades it was called MMS. Now all the same people, with a new figurehead, is called something else. And the reason they aren't BOEMRE? They didn't like being referred to as bummer. Distressing acronym, bummer.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')(2) The BOEM only surveys potential LEASE areas. They don't do these expensive surveys on areas that aren't open for leasing----and the vast majority of the offshore areas around the east coast, west coast, Puerto Rico and Alaska have never been open for leasing, and they've
never been looked at with modern multi beam, 3-d seismic, and other geophysical methods.
Who says that a survey requires such methods? Certainly your Lewis and Clark cartoon ( an expedition which fell under the title of "Discovery", not "Survey"), while quite amusing, didn't have as much to do with surveying as it did survival and exploration. The great surveys of the west happened later, and some explanation of them is offered here.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/c1050/surveys.htmAs far as only lease areas, well, can you tell me when they put offshore Maine up for lease? Because certainly here is a "survey", particularly in the Lewis and Clark sense (or at least until someone else does the work, which they will then turn over to Bummer, the MMS, or their descendants.
Here is the current "survey" for the east coast. And nice chunks of Alaska.
http://www.boem.gov/Oil-and-Gas-Energy- ... Index.aspxCertainly if they had all the new and cool stuff, they would use it, if only because the companies cough it up along the way. A requirement they are happy to tell you about, should you bump into any of these "surveyists".
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')(3) Making a modern, scientific survey of US coastal waters is just common sense. In the same way that Lewis and Clark and John Wesley Powell did scientific (and economic) surveys of the American west in the 19th century, its time for the US to survey its submarine waters.
It is common sense. But certainly Obama isn't about to pay for 3D seismic across the entire eastern seaboard, hell, he might be responsible for finding some conventional oil fields! And a Republican will demand that industry pay for it, because private industry does it better and why should taxpayer money do it for them!
In either case, it looks like bummer is doing about as much modern inventory they can, with the restrictions available. And unless you have a palatable scheme for funding god knows how many billions of dollars of seismic, it isn't even a feasible concept until the price of crude justifies the companies taking the risk and investing the money themselves.
As far as what seismic is capable of, I wonder if it is capable of finding the unconventional accumulations which appear to be pumping so much new oil into the system nowadays? When things aren't structure dependent, seismic strikes me as wonderful way to miss what in North Dakota has turned into one of the larger oil "structures" in the entire country.
And considering the amount of oil in old oil fields, versus new ones (another thread around here somewhere about the new US Survey estimates), who needs the new ones for awhile yet anyway? Go heat some old oil up, flush it out with CO2, drill crapy rock and frac the crap out of it, all the things which keep changing the baseline of how much is actually recoverable, a problem that peak oil continues to trip over every year as another round of reserve increases come along.